USER INTRODUCTION 2 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 4aivweb.es/docs/user-research-portfolio-aibarguen.pdf · INTRODUCTION 2 OBJECTIVES 4 USER RESEARCH 7 Research Methods 8 FINDINGS 12 Critical

USER

RESEARCHWebsite portfolio

prototype

Researcher & Author:

Álvaro Ibargüen Villa

UX, UI & Visual Designer

| +34 695 42 17 92

| [email protected]

| aivweb.es

Tel.

E-mail

Online

INTRODUCTION 2

OBJECTIVES 4

USER RESEARCH 7

Research Methods 8

FINDINGS 12

Critical Issue 14

Minor Issues 15

INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 17

POSSIBLE BIASES 24

INTRODUCTION

INTRODUCTION 3

When seeking new professional

opportunities, the same rules apply.

In a constantly changing world, it’s

important to stay up-to-date with the

latest web trends and to understand

our users… their experiences,

preferences, pains and behaviours.

OBJECTIVES

OBJECTIVES 5

The purpose of this user research is

to increase the possibilities of finding

new professional opportunities

by identifying and resolving potential

problems, gain insights and improve

the overall user experience.

OBJECTIVES 6

Main objectives

Confirm if people are having difficulty finding the portfolio

link on the CV and, if so, learn why and provide a solution

Ensure that the new user interface for the portfolio (website)

is easy to use and that users have a positive experience

Users should be familiar with content presentation,

navigation and interactions

Ensure that users can easily access the

contact section in the portfolio

1

2

3

USER RESEARCH

USER RESEARCH 8

Research Methods

Personas based on informal interviews with

users (validated in the usability test)

Benchmarking of other portfolio

and product websites

Published usability best practices,

as well as Nielsen heuristics

Remote usability testing with 5 users

Testing was proctored and users’ screens and audio were recorded

9USER RESEARCH / RESEARCH METHODS

Usability test sections

Demographic information collection

Country of residence, field of work, age, gender

Prototype design and tasks users carried out

Users were asked to think aloud as they performed each task

Short Likert scale survey

Usability Test: bit.ly/2og7Z1s Prototype Tested: bit.ly/2yFVwEg

10USER RESEARCH / RESEARCH METHODS

Tasks and scoring

Users were asked to accomplish

a series of tasks grouped into 6

sections, 11 individual tasks in total.

Task 1 A: Open the following link in a web browser:

[URL]

Task 1 B: Once open, click on the portfolio link.

Task 2 A: From the portfolio home page,

go to the UX / UI Design section.

Task 2 B: What element(s) indicate that you are

currently in the UX / UI Design section?

Task 3 A: In the UX / UI Design section, go to project “1”.

Task 3 B: View images and project information.

Task 3 C: Go to the project website.

Task 4: Go to the home page.

Task 5 A: Go to project “2.” in the Graphic Design section.

Task 5 B: Share that project on social media.

Task 6: Find the contact page.

11USER RESEARCH / RESEARCH METHODS

Points were assigned based on the amount of

time it took for users to complete each task.

Quick and easy 10 pts

Average time 8 pts

Took some time 6 pts

Took a long time 4 pts

Unable to

complete task 2 pts

Example:

A rating of ‘quick and easy’ was

assigned to Task 1 A by all 5 users.

This yielded a total score of 50

points (the highest possible score).

FINDINGS

FINDINGS 13

Overall, users had a very positive

experience with the portfolio prototype.

In the survey, 4 out of 5 users (80%) rated the user

interface prototype as ‘very intuitive’ (the highest

possible rating) and 91% of all tasks were carried out

‘quick an easy’, also the highest mark.

Nonetheless, there are areas for improvement.

The research identified 1 critical and 3 minor

issues. Let’s begin with the critical issue.

FINDINGS 14

Critical Issue

Issue #1

3 out of 5 users (60%) had difficulty in

locating the portfolio link on the CV.

‘Task 1 B: Click on the portfolio link’ earned a score of 32, while the rest of the

tasks earned scores between 48 and 50.

50

40

30

20

10

0

TASK 1 B THE OTHER TASKS

FINDINGS 15

Minor Issues

Issue #2

One user expected the entire ‘UX / UI Design’ box to be clickable. When this did

not occur after clicking on the text, the user

then clicked on the ‘View work’ button.

16FINDINGS / MINOR ISSUES

Issue #3

The same user used the browser back

button to return to the home page

instead of clicking on the logo.

Issue #4

A different user recommended as

optional including cookie crumbs to

assist less tech-savvy users navigate.

INSIGHTS &

RECOMMENDATIONS

INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 18

Insights

It is clear that users are familiar with the content

presentation, navigation, interactions and, for the most part,

do not need a ‘home’ button to return to the home page.

And once users view the portfolio content, they can

easily contact the person managing the website.

19INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS / INSIGHTS

Technical

Information technology (IT)

UX, UI Design, Web Design

Graphic design

(mainly print)

Digital marketing (SEO,

SEM, online campaigns,

e-commerce)

Reasons

Users for this product are young

professionals, between the ages

of 24 and 44, comfortable with

web technologies and familiar

with the interactions implemented

in the prototype design.

These are the 2 main

personas validated:

Social Sciences

Human Resources

/ Recruitment

1 2

40% Between the age of 25-34

40% Between the age of 35-44

20INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS / INSIGHTS

In addition to adapting best practices utilised by similar

websites, special attention was placed to following these

Nielsen usability heuristics for user interface design:

Visibility of system statusThe system should always keep users informed

about what is going on, through appropriate

feedback within reasonable time.

Match between system and the real worldThe system should speak the users’ language,

with words, phrases and concepts familiar to

the user, rather than system-oriented terms.

Consistency and standardsUsers should not have to wonder whether different

words, situations, or actions mean the same thing.

Recognition rather than recallMinimize the user’s memory load by making

objects, actions, and options visible.

Aesthetic and minimalist designDialogues should not contain information

which is irrelevant or rarely needed.

More on Nielsen usability heuristics

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/

ten-usability-heuristics

INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS 21

Recommendations

Issue #1 CRITICAL MANDATORY ACTION

Make the portfolio link clearly visible.

Most people are not visiting the portfolio

because it is not presented in a clear fashion.

During the usability test, 2 users stated

they were expecting something that looked

more like a Call to Action. Many also added

that the URL was getting lost because

the top area of the CV was too busy.

YES

NO

22INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS

Issue #2 MINOR RECOMMENDED ACTION

Make the entire box clickable.

While this is not a critical issue, it is a quick and

easy fix that will improve users’ experience by

avoiding moments of frustration (even if minor)

when things do not function as expected.

YES

NO

23INSIGHTS & RECOMMENDATIONS / RECOMMENDATIONS

Issues #3 & #4

MINOR OPTIONAL ACTION

Add cookie crumbs on project

detail (tier 3) pages to aid less

tech-savvy users navigate.

You may also add them on tier 2 pages, such

as the ‘UX / UI Design’ landing page.

Though this is optional, as it did not cause

anyone frustration, it’s always good to

cater to the needs of different users.

YES

INFO

This is not a problem mainly because the

top navigation is clear and always present.

POSSIBLE BIASES

POSSIBLE BIASES 25

While there is an extremely high level of confidence in the

results, there can be potential biases that influence.

Possible biases:

Recruitment of users for usability test

Two out of the 5 users have

relation with the test proctor.

Use of photo and real name on CV

The CV used in the usability test features the

name of a real person and photo. This could

have influenced either positively or negatively.

It would have been best to put a photo and

name placeholder to maintain neutrality.

Language of the usability test

The usability test onscreen instructions, CV

and survey are all in English. It is possible

that this may have slightly hindered the

capacity of non-native English speakers

(3 out of 5) to carry out certain tasks.

ENDThank you for taking the time

to read this research report.